A Second Helping of Torrey Smith’s 59-yard touchdown catch

TJ JohnsonJan 18, 2013 2:00 PM

Before the Broncos' epic meltdown last week, there were two interviews that, in retrospect, foreshadowed the chess match between Broncos defensive coordinator Jack Del Rio and Ravens offensive coordinator Jim Caldwell--a chess match that, at least early in the game, Caldwell pressed his unforseen advantage.

The first was an interview with Joe Flacco on the Dan Patrick show, in which Flacco asserted that the key to a Ravens victory would be establishing the run. While that's not exactly a news flash--we all knew the Ravens wanted to run the ball--it confirmed again in the minds of fans and likely the Broncos coaches the perception that the Ravens were going to give the Broncos a healthy dose of Ray Rice and rookie sensation Bernard Pierce.

And why wouldn't they? The dirtly little secret that emerged from watching film of the first matchup between the teams was that the Ravens, after stumbling on their first three drives, experienced a brief window in which they were indeed running the ball well against Denver. In a series of three consecutive plays in the second quarter, the Ravens ripped off runs of four, fourteen, and fifteen yards. The drive stalled on a penalty, or it's likely the Ravens would have scored. After that, the running game was generally abandoned by the Ravens because the Broncos got up in the game by two scores.

The point, though, is that both Del Rio and Caldwell knew the reality--the Ravens were a legitimate threat to run the ball, no matter what the score said in Week 15.

The second interview was with Anquan Boldin on Sirius XM NFL Radio and confirmed in a different way what the Ravens and Broncos were seeing on film. When asked why the Broncos were such a strong defense, Boldin indicated that it was Denver's ability to sit back in a Cover 2 shell and stop the run with their front seven; further, they could also generate pressure with the same front seven. In other words, the Broncos hadn't been resorting to a lot of tricks. They had been beating people straight up.

Again, the film from Week 15 confirms this. From the beginning of the game, the Broncos played a lot of Cover 2, Man Under coverage on passing downs, and without the threat of a running game, the Ravens didn't really have the chance to test the Broncos to see if that second-quarter success could be replicated throughout the rest of the afternoon.

There's no doubt that in the rematch, Caldwell was aiming to find out; Del Rio was determined to stop him.

Just how can we be sure of this? Well, the truth is we can't be completely sure, but it's very likely. In the rematch last Saturday, the Ravens ran the ball three out of their first five plays until they realized they were running into an eight-man box, not a seven-man box as in their first meeting. Essentially, Del Rio changed his defensive look between the two contests. Instead of playing Cover 2, Man Under like he had previously, he switched to a Cover 1, which brings the strong safety into the box and leaves the free safety as the only deep defender in coverage.

It took Caldwell only a series to crack the code, which brings us to Torrey Smith's first touchdown. Here's the pre-snap look:

Rahim Moore is playing behind Champ Bailey, who is in press man coverage, and Tony Carter and Chris Harris, who are in zone coverage. This second point may surprise because typically, Cover 1 employs man coverage underneath--sometimes in press coverage, sometimes in off-man coverage. At first glance, Carter and Harris could be playing off-man, but they're really not. Their 45-degree positioning, along with their eyes on the quarterback, give the zone coverage away. As it turns out, Mike Adams is playing zone as well.

And this is where it gets interesting. Caldwell uses what amounts to a double-cross concept--a common and clever way to attack Cover 1. Usually, the idea is to use the deep route to blow the man-free safety deep in order to hit something over the middle. In this case, the Ravens, knowing how aggressive Moore is at free safety, and knowing that Bailey would be playing tight-man on Smith all game - just as he had done in Week 15 - are hoping for the exact opposite. They want Moore to focus on crossing patterns like he does here:

Whether the Broncos are playing zone underneath here is somewhat unimportant in the big picture (we'll get to that in a moment). What's important is what Flacco is doing in the frame--staring Moore down while Torrey Smith is using his speed and his hands (a push-off he seems to have developed between the two meetings) to create separation from Champ Bailey.

After I watched this play the first ten or so times, I kept thinking that Moore is completely oblivious to Smith and Bailey simply because he screws up and bites on the crossing routes. That's likely what the Ravens are thinking in running this play the way they do. However, after realizing that Adams, Harris, and Carter are all playing a match-up zone, it becomes at least as likely that Moore is simply doing his job, which is to play centerfield and leave Bailey to his own devices--much like a box-and-one in basketball.

Here, it appears as if the linebackers and defensive backs (including Moore) are in a six-man match-up zone, while Bailey is doing battle on his own tiny island, no matter where Smith is going.

But Bailey is playing the outside shoulder, you say. He is expecting inside help. This just doesn't appear to be. Bailey is beaten to the inside by Smith on his release--nothing more, nothing less. In the above stillshot, it just seems as though Bailey is playing outside because he has already lost the battle with Smith at the line of scrimmage. Here's the result of the play:

This stillshot is precisely when Smith catches the ball. Notice how much farther Moore is away from the ball than Carter. I believe this is more evidence that Moore is supposed to stay in his middle zone. He never even considers looking Bailey's way during the entire play. Either Moore is the poorest safety on the planet, which is highly unlikely (excluding the Hail Mary at the end of regulation), or he is part of the zone shell.

It's not shocking that Del Rio would have put this package in for Baltimore. During the Week 15 matchup, Bailey was much more physical at the line of scrimmage with Smith. In fact, Bailey was dominant. Smith had a hard time even getting into his routes. It's a reasonable expectation that Bailey would have done so again.

Before we're done, though, it's well worth pointing out something else that stands out from these frames, and it's one of the reasons Bailey struggled. The Broncos simply failed to get pressure. In their first meeting, Flacco had, on average, only 2.46 seconds before he had to throw, scramble, or be sacked. In their second, Flacco averaged almost a full three seconds (2.95).

How is that possible? There are three reasons, in my view.

First, the Ravens did get their offensive line back and healthy, so let's give them that.

Second, they gave Flacco more max protection in the rematch. The touchdown to Smith is just one example. Play after play, especially out of the gun, the Ravens were determined to keep an extra blocker to give Flacco the time he needed.

Third, the Ravens did an effective job of passing on running downs (the touchdown to Smith came on a 2nd and 2) and running play-action so that the Broncos couldn't pin their ears back. Had the Broncos been able to go up by two scores at any point in this game (and I'm talking to you, Matt Prater), this all could have changed. But they didn't--the pass rush became average.

This shows up in a significant way when looking at both Elvis Dumervil and Von Miller's snap counts:

WEEK

Player

Total

Run

Rush

Coverage

% Rushing Passer

Week 15

Elvis Dumervil

61

19

42

0

68.85%

Week 15

Von Miller

62

17

38

7

61.29%

Divisional

Elvis Dumervil

80

41

37

2

46.25%

Divisional

Von Miller

76

36

28

12

36.84%

The snaps (as a percentage) in which Dumervil and Miller were rushing the passer in the rematch are horrifying--some of their their lowest percentages of the season. Miller's percentage was his fourth lowest (behind the games against Houston, New England, and week 17 against Kansas City) while Dumervil's was is fifth lowest (behind games against Houston, New England, and both matchups against Kansas City).

The main lesson is that the Broncos can't cause as much damage with their rush when playing in close games or from behinds (or against teams that rarely pass, Brady Quinn). But it also raises another question: Should Von Miller ever drop into coverage a dozen times, no matter the situation? Sure, he's become a complete linebacker, but I'd rather have the next Derrick Thomas rushing the quarterback if I can get it. Had Von rushed the passer in the 59-yard strike to Smith, it may not have mattered if Bailey was beaten or not. Flacco might not have had the time to find out.

In the second half, the Broncos went back to their Cover 2 shell as Boldin thought they might do, and the Broncos had more success--we count the Moore debacle as a freak accident--but by then the damage was done. The Cover 1 had failed, for a lot of reasons, to produce results.

Ted debunks Mark Kiszla's article suggesting that the Broncos would be better off using a 3-4 than a 4-3

Awesome man. I appreciate it.

I feel ya. I re-watched the play a few times last night and it sucked. I don't have access to All22 and I'm not about to purchase it for the sake of one argument.

The coverage shell to me was perfect for that play. The breakdown was obviously on Moore's part giving up depth for some insane reason.

Anyway, I'm curious to see what the overhead view looks like throughout the play. How many were deep and how the underneath and intermediate coverage looks like. I'm guessing they were in a 2/3/3 zone look with three over the top.

Thanks again.

Posted by robYardman on 2013-01-20 03:00:40

Rob,

I'll get on it, sure. And I'll even ask Ted and Doc to double check me to make sure there are six sets of eyes on it. I've not looked at the play more than a few times, obviously, because it forces me into the fetal position within seconds.

Any chance you can do this for the Jones TD reception? It's my impression the coverage call was right and Moore simply played it lazy and undisciplined while others I've argued with say the coverage shell was bad and Carter made a mistake paying underneath.

Posted by robYardman on 2013-01-20 01:16:20

Flacco is 7-4 (.636) in playoff games, while Manning is 9-11 (.450). I'm sure there are more important stats, but I'll let you argue them.

Posted by iamafreeman on 2013-01-19 17:20:15

The thing that drives me crazy with all this commentary about Flacco is the dude was 18-34 for 338, 52% completion! You take that 70 yrder away and all of a sudden he was 50% and had a shitty game. He has a huge arm and just threw the ball up and Smith went and got it. To not preasure Flacco into mistakes was inexcusable although I do believe they Balt got away with some serious holding calls as well.

Posted by Jd Cowan on 2013-01-19 14:40:25

TS, good post. I think that's a real possibility. It's certainly not a standard cover 3 to be sure. I also leave open the possibility of Moore being responsible, but if that's the case, he's ridiculously responsible and it was hard for me to think he didn't even give a look. Hard to know for sure. Watch, though a few seconds before the play. Moore cheats to Bailey's side, then moves to true center field. This leads me to believe there's no responsibility there.

It's possible Champ gave him the inside release, but I'm suspect after having watched it many times. Smith really did juke the living hell out of him from what I see. Your points though are all possibilities, however. I know this sounds like I'm making excuses for Champ, but Smith does a really good imitation of Michael Irvin with that hand push, and Flacco was going there the whole time. He just looks Moore off--and well.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2013-01-19 13:55:02

Uncle Rico Champ was targeted 7 times and surrendered 5 receptions and 2 TDs, a very un-Champ performance. Fact was, several of Denver's players had poor days in various categories, O and D, to the point where at times i wondered about scheme, but recognized that there was an aspect of coming out with fire that wasn't there (probably turned to ice). Just not a good game.

Great piece TJ - thanks for putting this up to look at and talk over. Lots of smart comments, too.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2013-01-19 06:56:33

Good piece of work, TJ. I appreciate your breakdown of this play.

There is a saying that when you miss a FG, it often comes back to bite you. Well, in this game it did. Baltimore came to play. Some of our guys did not have a good game. Hope Baltimore plays solid against the Pats on Sunday

Posted by BlackKnigh on 2013-01-19 03:54:48

The miss by Prater was huge! That extra 3 points puts the Ravens into more of a desperate mode. They would be pushing - and that usually causes mistakes.

Had he made that kick - would we be talking about the screw up by Moore at all - except as a footnote - that the guy screwed up - glad he didn't cost us the game?

Posted by BlackKnigh on 2013-01-19 03:47:30

Observing casually, as I always do....little to no pass rush to force Flacco into mistakes (which I thought he'd make on the road, in the cold, in altitude against our defense), and a significant number of non-called holds on Baltimore O-line. At least three to four I saw which should have been called but weren't. But nice to read commentary where that's taken out of the equation.

The coverage looks more like a modified Cover 3 to me than a straight up Cover 1, which would account for Harris and Carter playing zone. The modification is in giving Champ press man on Smith, leaving narrower deep zones for Carter, Harris, and Moore. I still think Moore screws up, because the first read for Flacco on that play is always going to be Smith, based on what the safety does. Smith options his route into a post when the middle of the field is open. And it still looks to me like Champ gives him the inside release. The play killed us in general, with Flacco's arm everyone is open on that play, which is why Moore is sucked down so low to begin with. It's hard to watch.

Posted by thestage on 2013-01-18 23:53:53

TJ, so much was made of Champ's domination of Smith in the reg. season game, but didn't Smith leave that game early in the 3rd quarter with a concussion? So for a half Champ won big against Smith but maybe the result would have been different had Smith played the whole game... and then Denver would have been less bullish on the matchup in the playoffs.

Posted by Uncle Rico on 2013-01-18 22:28:10

I agree he is not yet one of the elite, admittedly he had a career game. But he has taken his team to the playoffs every year he has started, and won at least one game. Like they say, he just wins.

Posted by iamafreeman on 2013-01-18 21:35:40

Hmm, you're right. It must be one of the backs that released out into the flat. I just assumed it was a TE, hadn't looked close enough at the first picture.

Still, back or TE, the closest defender is 7 yards away which would easily pick up the first even if the deep routes had been covered.

Posted by DCJ1 on 2013-01-18 19:10:06

OK, I sucked it up and read this, TJ. Great breakdown of their... well, breakdown. Still painful to think about it but by dissecting it we make it easier to understand and to see how the team has so many fixable elements that will learn from this and adapt. I feel better now.

Looks like 20 personnel to me. What TE? Unless a TE was lined up as one of the backs but I thought they had Leach for that.

Posted by RyanHennigan on 2013-01-18 18:28:04

Throwing a few good bombs does not make one elite, imho.

Posted by RyanHennigan on 2013-01-18 18:26:50

What we need is a way to make sure that Von isn't taken out the rush because of coverage responsibilities.

Posted by corangemanr on 2013-01-18 18:02:09

TJ Johnson I don't think he needs to "redeem" himself. Sure he made a bone head play, sure it was the worst time to do it. Does that suddenly negate the rest of the year? He was nothing short of starter quality.

You can let it get you down, or you can be reborn like a phoenix. If his rookie to sophomore year is any indication, he will be the latter.

Posted by RyanHennigan on 2013-01-18 17:54:45

What gets me about that coverage is that it looks like all the receivers are open to some extent. You can argue that Moore is in position to help stop the crossing routes if Flacco doesn't go deep, but the two middle receivers look to be open enough to get a pass. More disturbing is the TE going out in the flat.

If Flacco were to throw right at the instance of the middle screen shot, the TE probably has a 5-10 YAC run. In the middle of the field the receivers might have 10 yard catches, depending on how fast the coverage can recover.

I'm hoping this coverage scheme will get re-examined closely. It is way too soft.

Posted by DCJ1 on 2013-01-18 17:46:15

If Flacco beats the Patriots (again), will he get finally get some respect? He put all those long passes right where they needed to be. Not many QBs in the league could make that so, including ours. Let's give him some credit instead of just blaming our guys.

"It ain't no shame to be beaten by a master"Jonny Lang

Posted by iamafreeman on 2013-01-18 17:37:39

Also....and I HATE to be this guy, because the team got beat, plain and simple....but part of Doom's inability to generate pressure had to do with the fact that the Baltimore tackle had his arm fully wrapped around Doom's neck on at least 3 occasions that I can remeber.

Posted by Nick (ncm42) on 2013-01-18 17:32:26

I can understand why that's a possibility; that's the sort of play that can really haunt a guy, both in his head and in how the team / playmates relate to him. But given his growth during the last offseason I'm cautiously optimistic that he'll be able to bounce back and learn from it. I certainly hope his coaches and teammates are supportive of him. Bringing in a new DB coach, who won't have an emotional attachment to that play, figures to be to his benefit.

Posted by Hercules_Rockefeller on 2013-01-18 16:14:15

Did he drop into zone or get double teamed by the RT and running back? I thought that was him standing up at LDE before the snap, but I can't make out jersey numbers on the screencaps, so it's hard to tell.

This play does illustrate an ongoing concern re dumerville; he can dominate at times but dissapears for stretches at other times. Opposing OC's seem to agree, as they don't double team him nearly as much as they do miller (that said, if your choices are double Miller and double anybody else this side of lawrence taylor, you're going to double Miller quite a bit). No matter which coordinator wins the pre-snap chess match, there's always a player or two on either side in a one-on-one opportunity to out-execute his opponent. In this case, those players were Joe Flacco, Elvis Dumerville, Torrey Smith, and Champ Bailey.

That's why I'm dissapointed and surprised more than angry about Del Rio's gameplan; I'm sure he'll rebound next year, and he's still a great DC. But this wasn't his best game. By the time he made adjustments it was a bit too late. I think the defense was on it's heels enough that he couldn't really break out the agressive playcalling that's been our calling card*. Sometimes the other guy out coaches you early on and even if you make the right adjustments you're behind the 8-ball...

*Prater has a LOT to do with that as well as you wrote above... a potential 10-point swing before halftime changes the entire game dramatically.

Posted by Hercules_Rockefeller on 2013-01-18 16:11:32

Ryan, I know Mike Evans thinks Moore is done as a Bronco. I don't agree with that. I think he could redeem himself--whatever that means. At the end of the day, if he gives 100% and works hard, we all can live with the results.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2013-01-18 15:44:30

Screw therepy and Anti-depressants. After seeing how much work Moore put in from his rookie to sophomore year, I tend to believe he is already working on becoming better for 2013.

Posted by RyanHennigan on 2013-01-18 15:39:40

I wouldn't say outcoached necessarily. Del Rio had a plan, and that plan included Bailey taking Smith out like the first game. So he had to adjusted it in the second half. Sometimes guys just get beat on the release. I sure wish Champ still had that 2nd gear to track back and make up the space. Also, Smith really did pull a sweet(or bad depending on your view) hand push on Bailey when he dug (relatively speaking) to the inside.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2013-01-18 15:38:08

Herc, good point on the 4-3 Over. I think it's accurate. Your last point--I think it's going to be interesting to see what happens next year. JDR is damn smart. On this particular play, Miller dropped to the zone, and from the backside, Doom got smothered and just didn't do much.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2013-01-18 15:35:00

IMO, this was the worst-called defensive game we've seen all year. I was really dissapointed, becuase Del Rio has called the defense so masterfully all year long. Everybody has a bad game here and there, so I'm not throwing all the blame on him. If Dumerville had gotten some more pressure on Flacco the scheme might have worked (since they were taking Miller out with double teams so consistently), and everyone would be happy. But I think it's safe to say we got out coached on this one...

Posted by Hercules_Rockefeller on 2013-01-18 15:31:08

Good points, sadaraine, and I wrestled with them too. I think getting 8 into the box was important to them (not necessarily on this particular play), and with Champ's domination of Smith earlier in the year, I think they thought they could get away with Cover 1 and a nickel package similar to what they did with the Chiefs. In the 2nd half, though, they went back to the cover 2. JDR wasn't going to continue to let the deep ball beat them---except the Moore play, which, as we all know, was just one of the worst mental and physical errors we've seen.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2013-01-18 15:27:43

I agree with the speculation that Moore was doing his job on this play, and that his responsibility was to support the other CB's and rely on Bailey to get the job done on his own, just as the broncos have been doing for the last 7 seasons. It's not a bad strategy if one of the following statements are true:

1: Bailey can cover any route on the field by himself.2: The front 4 can get enough pressure on the passer that Bailey can play press man coverage and the longer routes won't have time to develop.

The first statement is a nit suspect, as even Bailey in his prime gets beat now and then, but it's a strategy that pays off more than it's bitten us in the ass over the years. The second is something that we've been able to rely on this year and couldn't against the Ravens, and to me it's a huge factor in the game. Part of that is that Miller was in coverage so much. It seemed like they were playing him as a true 4-3 SAM throughout a lot of the first half, as opposed to the formation where they've got 3 DL's and Miller up on the LOS, playing more as a stand-up DE. in the former, it looked to me that he had the responsibility of covering the TE if he runs a route, whereas in the latter he's rushing the passer and another LB or safety has the TE in coverage. They got away from that later in the game, but for a while Miller was pretty ineffective becuase he was in coverage so much.

No matter how good Miller is in coverage, if I'm an OC, and I've got the choice between Miller blanketing my TE and having to double team him to keep my QB upright, I'll use the TE to take him out of the play every single time.

Posted by Hercules_Rockefeller on 2013-01-18 15:24:44

Here's the funny thing about this to me. I understand why JDR would want to switch up the defense like this, but why the heck didn't he just assign man coverage underneath and add Von as a blitzer? Harris and Carter both are supremely talented at man on man coverage. Let them do their jobs.

Also we know that the Raven's do the most damage with the long-ball. Why not scheme to make sure that is not an option? I know hindsight is 20/20, but looking back now, some of what we didn't doesn't make sense. The Raven's offense isn't a complicated thing to figure out.

Posted by sadaraine on 2013-01-18 15:23:35

SNF, Yes. The Broncos were in Nickel, but based on the personnel package. That's correct. Obviously, the Broncos were playing the pass when they saw that Flacco was in the gun, but on 2nd and 2, the Ravens could have easily handed the ball off.

Notice who has the left flat? Von Miller. That's a tough pill to swallow.

Posted by TJ Johnson on 2013-01-18 14:51:53

Question: you say the Ravens did a good job of passing on running downs, but in the example the Broncos were in Nickel. Doesn't that indicate that they were expecting a pass or was that purely based on the personell the Ravens put into the game for that down?

Posted by supernaturalfeat on 2013-01-18 14:39:53

I'm sure this is a great piece but I'm not yet ready to read about this until I've had a couple more sessions of therapy and a new supply of anti-depressants. ;)